Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Poll: 85% say Christian photographer has the right to turn down a gay-marriage job
Hotair ^ | 07/12/2013 | AllahPundit

Posted on 07/12/2013 5:58:37 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

This is no idle hypothetical from Rasmussen. A photography studio in New Mexico was fined years ago under the state’s Human Rights Act for refusing to accept a lesbian couple’s request to photograph their commitment ceremony because it was contrary to the owners’ Christian beliefs. The studio lost several rounds of appeals because the state’s antidiscrimination law forbids “public accommodations” from discriminating on the basis of orientation. As Gabe Malor said a few weeks ago after the big SCOTUS DOMA decision, this is the next flashpoint in political skirmishing over gay rights. Does free exercise of religion extend to how you run your business?

A heavy, heavy majority says yep, sure does:

If a Christian wedding photographer who has deeply held religious beliefs opposing same-sex marriage is asked to work a same-sex wedding ceremony, 85% of American Adults believe he has the right to say no. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only eight percent (8%) disagree even as the courts are hearing such challenges.

You can, if you like, agree with the majority here without bringing free exercise into it. A strong-form libertarian would say that the photographer has a right to refuse for whatever reason he chooses, religious or not. It’s a matter of private property, not free exercise. That hasn’t been the law in America for 50 years, though; “public accommodations” are statutorily barred from discriminating on the basis of race and certain other categories. And needless to say, you’re not going to see national Republicans rally behind the idea that businesses should have a general right to discriminate restored. (Even Rand Paul’s unlikely to take that position at this point.) Stick with the religious justification and you’re on firmer ground in an overwhelmingly religious country, even one that increasingly supports gay marriage. The big stumbling block here for gay-rights activists is that their most compelling argument to opponents no longer applies: “It doesn’t affect you” is a good, solid, libertarian justification for legalized marriage, not so good when it means business owners will be forced to work with you whether they want to or not. I haven’t seen many polls on this particular question, but if Ras is right that we’re looking at a spread of upwards of 80 points, then national Democrats will stay far away from this topic. Critics of SSM argue that the slippery slope has no stopping point but 85/8 would seem to have plenty of stopping power — enough so that I wonder if a constitutional amendment would be in the offing if the Supreme Court sided with gay-rights supporters on the free exercise question.

The New Mexico case isn’t the only instance of this sort of thing happening, by the way. Erick Erickson has collected other incidents at the state level. The issue hasn’t broken out significantly among the population, though, I think, because people have been too consumed with the gay-marriage debate. As that recedes, that’ll change.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: 2013polls; christian; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; newmexico; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills

1 posted on 07/12/2013 5:58:37 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Damn right the studio has a right to refuse.


2 posted on 07/12/2013 6:01:09 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes, this is not like a civil rights case.

While the state may decide it wants to treat immoral behavior as normal, people should not be forced to participate or facilitate or provide services to immoral behavior.


3 posted on 07/12/2013 6:03:17 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes, this is not like a civil rights case.

While the state may decide it wants to treat immoral behavior as normal, people should not be forced to participate or facilitate or provide services to immoral behavior.


4 posted on 07/12/2013 6:03:18 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If you can’t refuse business, then you don’t really own your business. I mean, I think they should have charged a premium and taken the money, but certainly it is their right to do so or not.


5 posted on 07/12/2013 6:04:53 PM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That should be 100%.


6 posted on 07/12/2013 6:05:09 PM PDT by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

religion is a right, homosexuality is not.


7 posted on 07/12/2013 6:07:49 PM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Simple, call yourself a muslim and you can do whatever you want.


8 posted on 07/12/2013 6:10:21 PM PDT by Porterville (Methink'st thou art a general offence and every man should beat thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Refusing a project is a lot different from refusing a project or an event. What if you paint family portraits and you get asked to paint a pornographic scene? You can’t refuse?


9 posted on 07/12/2013 6:12:37 PM PDT by MNDude (Sorry for typos. Probably written on a smartphone, and I have big clumsy fingers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
That's not what the Civil Right legislation, that is now part of US law states.

If you are generally open to the public then you cannot deny your products/services to certain protected categories such as race, sex, etc.

Sexual orientation has now been added as a special category, if not explicitly then at least implicitly by the ruling on DOMA.

The interesting thing will be to see if some more radical gays get too far ahead of the official gay agenda. If the radical gays can cool their heels for a few years then most businesses will be OK with serving gays. Then the few odd Christian hold-outs will just look like backward yokels. However, if some of the more radical types start pushing on this too fast then it could cause a backlash.

It almost makes me suggest that Christians should dare the more ardent gays to go for it in order to cause a backlash.

What happened in the 60's after the Civil Rights laws were passed? Were there motel operators that considered it a sin to give a room to a mixed race couple? Were they supported by their communities or were they drummed out of business?

10 posted on 07/12/2013 6:13:28 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Know sin, know sodomy, no service.


11 posted on 07/12/2013 6:14:32 PM PDT by twister881
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNDude
"get asked to paint a pornographic scene"

Pornography and/or pornographers are not a protected class ... even though what passes for entertainment these days suggests it has the blessing of the powers that be.

12 posted on 07/12/2013 6:14:34 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: manc

I heard a story from my college classmate weeks back that his younger brother who is a DJ who does weddings etc, found out it was a faggot wedding or some union ceremony etc.

He knew in the back of his head these homos were probably angling for a lawsuit so he asked when, where etc, and he later he provided an invoice which was more than triple the original quote. His BS excuse was that he had brand new equipment, new employees, the irs was on his back so he had to jack up the price etc. But he got his objective that the fudgepackers turned him down, not the other way around.


13 posted on 07/12/2013 6:14:59 PM PDT by max americana (fired liberals in our company after the election, & laughed while they cried (true story))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

As a working professional photographer, the LAST thing you want to do is have a photographer working a job that they don’t want to be at.

Talk about photos that would fail to meet even the worst expectations.

It’s almost funny if you think about it.


14 posted on 07/12/2013 6:17:47 PM PDT by Vermont Lt (Does anybody really know what time it is? Does anybody really care?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ooops!

Forgot to put film in the camera.

And the battery went dead.

Sorry girls. Or boys. Or whatever you are today.


15 posted on 07/12/2013 6:18:22 PM PDT by Iron Munro (The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Photographers, bakers, and innkeepers are one thing. Wait til we have medical practitioners forced from retirement to perform late-term abortions, lebsian inseminations, and sex changes. How anyone can say “that will never happen” is beyond me.


16 posted on 07/12/2013 6:19:28 PM PDT by workerbee (The President of the United States is DOMESTIC ENEMY #1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"Gay homosexual marriage"

What you talkin' about, Willis? Men marry women.

17 posted on 07/12/2013 6:20:00 PM PDT by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manc

I think a business should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason. (short of life and death situations)

Allowing businesses to choose their customers is actually good for the economy. If a black man doesn’t want to serve whites it opens up two more business opportunities. A klansman could open a whites only business and a third business could serve everyone.

I don’t want to eat in a muslim restaurant and will happily take my business elsewhere. A couple months back I ate in a Detroit restaurant that is basically a blacks only restaurant. The only reason I got in the door was because the owner knew we were coming.


18 posted on 07/12/2013 6:25:00 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Does that mean the remaining 15% of the people sampled were faggots and lezbos?


19 posted on 07/12/2013 6:29:40 PM PDT by MIchaelTArchangel (Have a wonderful day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All
The state law is in violation of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment imo. Section 1 of the 14th Amendment prohibits the states from making laws which abridge privileges or immunities expressly protected by the Constitution, in this case the 1st Amendment protected freedom of religious expression. Also, note that the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect so-called gay rights.

In fact, regardless of recent PC, pro-gay interpretations of the equal protections clause of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment by activist justices and activist state judges concerning gay marriage, please consider the following. Constitution-respecting justices had previously sided with the state, deciding that the equal protections clause did not apply in Minor v. Happersett, a case where Virginia Minor had argued that her citizenship gave her the right to vote regardless of a state law that allowed only men to vote.

Based on the Supreme Court's decision in Minor, what the equal protections clause actually does is the following imo. The states can make laws which discriminate on the basis of criterion not expressly protected by the Constitution, the sex of marriage partners for example. But the states are expected to apply such laws equally to everybody affected by a given criterion.

20 posted on 07/12/2013 6:46:42 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Of course they have the right to refuse...just as certainly as a pervert photography firm can refuse to cover a normal wedding.


21 posted on 07/12/2013 6:47:36 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (The Civil Servants Are No Longer Servants...Or Civil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Even McDonald’s has a sign stating they reserve the right to refuse service. If a fast food joint can refuse to serve someone burgers, a bakery can refuse to make a wedding cake and a photographer can refuse to take pictures.


22 posted on 07/12/2013 6:59:45 PM PDT by bgill (This reply was mined before it was posted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

price the job high enough to make them go away.... It a time and services choice...


23 posted on 07/12/2013 7:01:30 PM PDT by ptsal (Repubicans swallowing more kool-aide from Rove & Kristol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

As another photographer, I agree. Why would anyone want someone who doesn’t know or like you to capture “the most important day of your life.”


24 posted on 07/12/2013 7:05:47 PM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Stellar example of how gay “rights” is about removing rights.


25 posted on 07/12/2013 7:09:59 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The unfortunate casualty of the black civil rights movement was freedom of association. When people were no longer allowed to choose whom they did business with, their freedom was diminished.


26 posted on 07/12/2013 7:16:40 PM PDT by GenXteacher (You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Yes, this is not like a civil rights case.

WE may not believe it is, but that is how it's being presented to the American public, and too many 'low information voters' are believing the lies, and making it worse by voting FOR homosexual 'marriage' in some states that have brought it to the public for a vote.

27 posted on 07/12/2013 7:31:30 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

At the print shop I work at (I’m the graphic designer), a creepy individual came in and started asking about wedding invitations, getting a price quote (I’m overhearing this, I didn’t deal with the customer), and he asked about “putting a rainbow” on it.

I immediately knew. The person who took the order, came back to me, and I asked, “Did he ask about a rainbow?” She looked at me all bewildered and laughed, “I didn’t realize that until you said it.”

We laughed, but I told her that I wasn’t going to do it. She shrugged her shoulders and said, “I don’t have a problem with it.”

*Sigh* Usually she and I agree on everything else.


28 posted on 07/12/2013 8:05:15 PM PDT by Thorliveshere (Tais deau sá taghdedaul!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I’d take the job and then make sure that my finger was in every picture.


29 posted on 07/12/2013 8:10:07 PM PDT by twhitak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kabumpo

They want to hassle and subjugate the photog and probably don’t even care about his pictures, they will have enough cheering friends with their own smartphones and Photoshop to fix up the images to get what they really want.


30 posted on 07/12/2013 8:11:47 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Whatever promise that God has made, in Jesus it is yes. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Placemark.


31 posted on 07/12/2013 9:57:56 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It wasn’t that long ago that in order to do business with the government you had to work under their rules. Now even private businesses are told how to do business and who to do it with. Sad times.


32 posted on 07/12/2013 9:59:29 PM PDT by VerySadAmerican (If you vote for evil because you can't see evil, you ARE evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

bump


33 posted on 07/12/2013 10:05:43 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The gays have to be real jerks to take this to the government and get the photographer hassled and fined.

Maybe that’s part of why he didn’t want to work with them.


34 posted on 07/13/2013 6:07:41 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

You know what “civil rights” laws have done to freedom of association and property rights.


35 posted on 07/13/2013 6:27:19 AM PDT by metesky (Brethren, leave us go amongst them! - Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond, The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: metesky

Exactly. I’ve got no use for racists but whether I choose to associate with them or cater to them should be entirely up to me.

I don’t think the black restaurant owner was racist, he just lives in his reality. Its a 98% black neighborhood and he points out that whites eating in his restaurant would likely cost him his reliable daily black customers. I know a hush sure fell across the room when I walked in the door.

However there are places that whites tend to congregate among themselves in Detroit too.


36 posted on 07/13/2013 6:51:47 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

37 posted on 07/13/2013 7:02:39 AM PDT by Peet (Come back with a warrant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson